Society has regressed and people devolved so much that the very notions of "progress" have been inverted, reversed.

Nihilism is a state such that idealism and realism is blurred together. The child's world of fantasy is extended far into "adulthood". Where are the adults? One strong symbol of this occurrence is the rise of Hollywood, the "entertainment industry", television programming, and the advancement of propaganda and institutionalizing memes within them. Hollywood in particular, a reflection of the liberal-left, have become very outspoken and news-prominent as of late. From movements such as #metoo to actresses wearing all black, society feeds on such attention. But what are actors, actresses, and thespians, except attention-seekers, hounding for fame? And many of them will do just about anything to get it, including, selling-out what few or little morals they entered Hollywood with to begin.

What is an actor, except, an adult pretending to be other people? Child's play, grown up. And the more actors pretend, the more famous and renowned they become. Here is the main point though:

Nihilism and social degeneracy have spread so much, more and more Modern people look to Hollywood for leadership, for inspiration, and for meaning. This is blurred when Modern people cannot differentiate fantasy from reality, and so it is done through theater, television, and movies. The average Modern believes that the actor is the actual person portrayed by his/her acting. Moderns cannot differentiate between the movie and "real-life". Because of this, actors and actresses have gained an unfamiliar notoriety, that actors and actresses have worthy political opinions or wise insights, about life. But do they? How can you trust adults who make a career on make-believe, and pretending to be other people?

The popular super-hero genre is another telling symbol. Children want to fantasize about heroes, and so this genre is expectantly popular. But are actors and actresses "heroes" in real-life? Are they really leaders of society? Are they really worthy or valuable contributors of society? Of course they are not. Traditionally and classically, actors and actresses have held very little social hierarchy. Because actors environment is the Stage. And what is a Stage, a show, except a fakery? A place of fancy and fantasy? An entertainment, a spectacle, pretty lights, beautiful sounds, a distraction, from reality.

A catharsis. A focal point.

Thus Hollywood has risen to undue prominence and power, casting spells of fantasy, not only over those in the US, but throughout the world. Even China has had to put up "The Great Wall of the Internet", to block 'outside' interference and influence. East Asia carefully monitors, and censors, western media. Because they know the danger of propaganda and such influence.

Speaking of which, Hollywood, within the past 20 years, have turned from simple fantasies, into a full political-movement. Instead of movies being about entertainment, per se, now there are unspoken 'quotas' that this lead needs to be a woman, or black, such as in the newer Star Wars releases. New quotas to meet the underlaying political propaganda and scheme. Hollywood is permeating into areas previously unknown to it. If Moderns have been accepting the sedative, the drug, the mind-numbing poison thus far, then why not up the dose? Why not insert and inject new levels of depravity into the popular myths, dreams, and psyche of the populace?

All that said, any 'progression' of society would need to overturn Hollywood, and re-embrace the concept of reality. No fakery, no lying, but a confrontation to the very existence that Modern people attempt to escape from, through the fulcrum of fantasy and make-believe. So what is it exactly that people are running from, and into where? Fleeing a mundane life, of daily toil and boredom, into worlds more exciting and full of potential?

Let me play the devil's advocate here and ask you: Is it really Hollywood to blame? Or could it be that people WANT to see fantasy, and Hollywood capitalizes on that. Even fiction movies that allude to the truth in metaphorical way draw audience because of their fictitious/artistic presentation, not because of the truth value they deliver (which may be considered after the fact). Do you think Matrix generated $170 million because of its truth value? I think not.http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=matrix.htmIt is ironic that even in order to tell a truth, you'd have to lie and exaggerate. I am not saying how it should be but how it seems to work with many people's psychologies. Inspiration through a lie. (maybe similar to Lee's Life of Pi, or Sigh's The Fall, which deal with self/other deception in order to convey a realistic message because the character is either too immature/weak, or unwilling to face reality head on)

It reminds me of the of the photography vs paining debate. Photography, it is said, is not art, because it only documents, it does not produce anything new, or its own. It just copies, it does not produce or create. If Hollywood switched to producing only documentaries, I'm pretty sure its audience would drop, and then it would go broke. And the first story teller with extraordinary story to step out would become a literary hero again. So, who's to blame if people themselves are drawn fantasy and exaggeration and seek out the most extraordinary story teller? It's like sugar addiction; people naturally crave sugar and someone steps in to exploit it - because it is an exploitable craving. Not all are susceptible to it, of course. Some like realistic dramas, and if something in the plot is outside the realistic probabilities the viewer might feel insulted, or looked down upon, and refuse to follow along any further. This could be interpreted in many ways, such as a person who might have an undeveloped imagination, or one who prefers to stay within rigid confines of realism; though he might still identify with childhood fantasy stories (because children will believe in fantasy); but then, he would identify specifically with his own childhood (past self, and not the present). But this might be an increasing minority of general population, as Hollywood feeds unrealistic "hyper symbolic" and detached and sugar-coated themes to ever increasing audience, as if it tires to preserve and elevate the importance of human life, of self. In Hollywood, no matter what happens with a character, good or bad, it must happen with a bang, flair and fireworks.

There is something very wrong with people who demand strict realism in art. Imagine poetry that does not rhyme simply because people naturally do not speak in rhymes. They are trying to make art more serious than it actually is.

I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.-- Mr. Reasonable

Pandora wrote:Let me play the devil's advocate here and ask you: Is it really Hollywood to blame? Or could it be that people WANT to see fantasy, and Hollywood capitalizes on that.

Both.

The Hollywood effect is the exponential rise of monetary value, profit-seeking, economical impact of media, and now the political impacts as well. There's practically a new quota-system in modern movies that must appeal to females and minorities. I'm pointing that out.

Pandora wrote:Even fiction movies that allude to the truth in metaphorical way draw audience because of their fictitious/artistic presentation, not because of the truth value they deliver (which may be considered after the fact). Do you think Matrix generated $170 million because of its truth value? I think not.http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=matrix.htmIt is ironic that even in order to tell a truth, you'd have to lie and exaggerate. I am not saying how it should be but how it seems to work with many people's psychologies. Inspiration through a lie. (maybe similar to Lee's Life of Pi, or Sigh's The Fall, which deal with self/other deception in order to convey a realistic message because the character is either too immature/weak, or unwilling to face reality head on)

It reminds me of the of the photography vs paining debate. Photography, it is said, is not art, because it only documents, it does not produce anything new, or its own. It just copies, it does not produce or create. If Hollywood switched to producing only documentaries, I'm pretty sure its audience would drop, and then it would go broke. And the first story teller with extraordinary story to step out would become a literary hero again. So, who's to blame if people themselves are drawn fantasy and exaggeration and seek out the most extraordinary story teller? It's like sugar addiction; people naturally crave sugar and someone steps in to exploit it - because it is an exploitable craving. Not all are susceptible to it, of course. Some like realistic dramas, and if something in the plot is outside the realistic probabilities the viewer might feel insulted, or looked down upon, and refuse to follow along any further. This could be interpreted in many ways, such as a person who might have an undeveloped imagination, or one who prefers to stay within rigid confines of realism; though he might still identify with childhood fantasy stories (because children will believe in fantasy); but then, he would identify specifically with his own childhood (past self, and not the present). But this might be an increasing minority of general population, as Hollywood feeds unrealistic "hyper symbolic" and detached and sugar-coated themes to ever increasing audience, as if it tires to preserve and elevate the importance of human life, of self. In Hollywood, no matter what happens with a character, good or bad, it must happen with a bang, flair and fireworks.

[/quote]That's a great example and one of the reasons I use the Matrix as a prime example of the phenomenon. It's an ironic message, conveying to the masses of humanity, their own slavery, and then selling the image back to them. A twisted irony, to profit so hugely from it.

Karpel Tunnel wrote:Wait there weren't quotas before 20 years ago? Hollywood didn't have political messages in say, the 40s, didn't have messages about what women, men, let alone other categories ARE AND SHOULD BE?

Propaganda has advanced and is now exponential.

Also the political messages in the 1940s-1960s are almost the exact opposite as the prevalent messages today. Housewives, traditional gender-roles, the nuclear family, the Red Scare, etc.

It seems the Red Scare is still alive though. The government scared the US populace of Russian, and still do it today (scapegoating the Democrat loss in the recent election).

I think that such psychology existed way before Hollywood. Yes, people look to Hollywood to tell them what they are. But what came first? Look what is happening on YouTube - a free social media outlet. Nobody’s forcing people to tell particular views so what is driving the psychologies of people like flat earthers and conspiracy theorists? Where are all these ideas coming from? Why, given the enormous amount of information available at their fingertips (including basic common sense), do some people reach for the most extraordinary explanation (such as of an artifact or an event)? The basic message is “look, we live in a lie”, be it due to government conspiracy or some hidden historical facts. This is not coming from Hollywood, but it is the same kind of psychology that exists in population that is drawn to alternate explanations. The only thing that I can deduce is that this psychology has always existed but is now simply not actively sensored or controlled by society. It now has a free outlet. Perhaps a more fundamental question is whether people have changed that much since the advent of industrial revolution and scientific exploration, or whether there is still vestigial superstitious instinct that survived. There was no Youtube some 100 years ago so I can’t say that there werent some poor crazies coming up with alternate explanations but who just did not have an outlet to the world (unless they were of the right social status and in the right circles). I think in regard to ancient history there was still plenty of speculation, and some of it was quite conspiratorial in nature. This is not a modern occurrence since occultism, esoterism, spirituality, theosophy, a lot of which was drawn from ancient history, have existed long before the advent of scientific revolution. Ancient history is a great ground for such extraordinary speculations because there is a gap thst is not filled (did Piri Reis’ charts of the antarctic point to the location of ancient Atlantis?). I’m talking of the likes of pseudoscientists like Graham Hancock who have always been around. But it doesn’t even have to be ancient history, even science itself is used to that end. All it needs is a little of ambiguity. For example, when scientists have found a magnetic anomaly in the Antarctic, the conspiracy theorists were quick to jump in and fill in with possible extraordinary explanations, including it being a portal to another world. Now, this is not coming from Hollywood. There are people who are drawn to this stuff and the psychology behind it is as old as the society itself.

In regards to Asian films, I see a lot of mythical heroes and supernatural forces, there as well, they’re just in line with their own cultural myths and legends, so a division really is cultural (although they do adopt western technology for computer special effects). And to me, it’s not really that fundamentally different then, say, older Kung fu movies, in which the hero harnesses some force that gives him a super athletic power to defeat his opponents. Except now it’s just more obvious in the films, people now actually fly though the air, and shapeshift, and battle visible supernatural forces. Asian culture is more superstitious than western, so they may actually interpret these things a little more literally. (I’m talking about chi, and karma, bad luck, and spirits of deceased, and such)

Art is both escape from and interpretation of reality and it is important to understand the distinction between the two as they are most definitely not the same

Hollywood is a business whose primary function is profit and all other considerations are irrelevant to this simple but important and necessary economic truth The opinions of actors are deemed important because they are famous and the views of the famous have always been sought regardless of how valid they are

Also You Tube is not intellectually free even though that is not what you meant by free [ is also true for facebook and twitter ]As far as Flat Earthers are concerned I am not surprised by anything that originates from the human mind whatever it might be

I think we should do some justice to Hollywood and acknowledge that Hollywood makes the best movies there are despite all of their flaws. I'd rather watch any random Hollywood movie than the best indie movie out there that is full of "messages".

Why do people look for "messages" in art? Two possible reasons:

1. they are ashamed of the fact that their time is spent on a frivolous activity that is art2. they are artists who are not satisfied with their position in the social hierarchy so they want to convince others that their work is far more important than it really is

The outcome is this:

Speaking of which, Hollywood, within the past 20 years, have turned from simple fantasies, into a full political-movement. Instead of movies being about entertainment, per se, now there are unspoken 'quotas' that this lead needs to be a woman, or black, such as in the newer Star Wars releases.

Instead of being about simple fantasies, which is what all art is about, it is now about politics.

I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.-- Mr. Reasonable

Art is about entertainment. I don't like this pseudo-intellectual dichotomy between art and entertainment. Art isn't history. It isn't science either. It's not even documentaries which are more relaxed than the aforementioned two. A degree of realism in art is a good thing because of familiarity. It is actually familiarity that matters. Too much fantasy makes the rules of the fictional world unfamiliar - weird.

I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.-- Mr. Reasonable

Pandora wrote:I think that such psychology existed way before Hollywood. Yes, people look to Hollywood to tell them what they are. But what came first? Look what is happening on YouTube - a free social media outlet. Nobody’s forcing people to tell particular views so what is driving the psychologies of people like flat earthers and conspiracy theorists? Where are all these ideas coming from?

Ideas do have a biological root, and are intertwined with genetics. Consider that classical Hollywood appealed to white males, for example, through 1940-1970. This is because white males held most or all of the economic, political, and social power. For movies and television to be sold, using commercialism, Hollywood sold art and dreams to the Middle Class.

Today the Middle Class has changed, and expanded, so as to include women, minorities, and black people. Now "Classical" Hollywood also includes, more and more, women and minorities into their images. The new Star Wars. The new television programs. The new commercials. All of this is done to sell, and make money. In a way, the well has run dry in terms of economic, money supply, for white males. White males have lost a lot of buying-power, whereas women and minorities have picked up the slack. Now the women and minorities have the buying-power. And so Hollywood seeks to cater new propaganda, new fantasies, to them.

This all corresponds perfectly with the recent #metoo movements, feminist agendas, blacks fighting to get into the Academy awards or Oscars. Blacks want to get their foot in the door, to be recognized, to be appreciated by the white establishment. All of these factors change the relationship between reality and fantasy (the newer movies, tv programs, images, music, etc).

Pandora wrote:Why, given the enormous amount of information available at their fingertips (including basic common sense), do some people reach for the most extraordinary explanation (such as of an artifact or an event)? The basic message is “look, we live in a lie”, be it due to government conspiracy or some hidden historical facts. This is not coming from Hollywood, but it is the same kind of psychology that exists in population that is drawn to alternate explanations. The only thing that I can deduce is that this psychology has always existed but is now simply not actively sensored or controlled by society. It now has a free outlet. Perhaps a more fundamental question is whether people have changed that much since the advent of industrial revolution and scientific exploration, or whether there is still vestigial superstitious instinct that survived.

The base population, 80% of humanity, are literally inheritors of slave-genetics, and this reflects lower levels of intelligence. Low and average intelligent humanity clings to mythology, fantasy, and whatever 'conspiracy' theory, because this is how their minds retain ideals of control. If everything can be reduced to mind-games, to disregard reality, then this is how the powerless retain the hope for control in their own minds and personal lives. If reality can be negated, annulled, then low and average intelligent people, feel that they can 'control' or begin to order life, in their own way.

They're wrong, but, mystical thinking, believing in conspiracy theories, fantasies, flat-earth, Bush did 9-11, Illuminati lizard people, all of this shit represent mental symptoms. Symptoms of illness, particularly of (ir)rationality. When people are not beholden to rational thought, reasoning, thinking, proving your claims about existence as true, then they are "free" to believe in any bullshit they want.

This is the very essence of Liberal-Leftist-Socialist political motivations, Pandora. It's not only a matter of entertainment, but of deeper human nature. Nihilists want to be 'freed' from the past, because their past represents slavery, represents being beholden to logic, rationality, mistakes, and bad choices. A slavish past. Only when they confront their past, and their present mental compulsions, could they ever begin to understand notions of "freedom" versus "slavery".

This is the Master-Slave dialectic, look into that, for more answers. You're scratching the surface still.

Go deeper. Why would a bunch of idiots believe that "Sandy Hook" was fake, paid actors on every screen, and a complete denial of the reality of the situation? Could it be that some morons just want attention, and this is how desperate they are to get it? Could it be that reality is brutal, savage, cruel, mean, and some people are desperate to escape it? Could it be that some people need a salve, a scape-goat, and believe "the government" or "the gods" are "behind everything"?

Because these people cannot begin to imagine how they-themselves could be responsible for anything in life.

surreptitious75 wrote:This is true but the largest film industry is actually the Indian one

India copies a lot of its material, or most of it, from Hollywood.

East Asia, such as China, consumes Western media freely (after censoring it), but lack a history of theater and drama that Graeco-Roman culture has produced and evolved for millenniums now. That's why all the best media (propaganda) is "Western". Graeco-Roman theatrical history has the most experience, throughout the world. In Japan, they do not have actors and actresses, really, and so have compensated with 'anime' and drawing renditions, more suited to Japanese artistry of the past. This is why 'anime' is big in East Asia where the theatrical history was lacking (or completely absent).

Today the Middle Class has changed, and expanded, so as to include women, minorities, and black people. Now "Classical" Hollywood also includes, more and more, women and minorities into their images. The new Star Wars. The new television programs. The new commercials. All of this is done to sell, and make money. In a way, the well has run dry in terms of economic, money supply, for white males. White males have lost a lot of buying-power, whereas women and minorities have picked up the slack. Now the women and minorities have the buying-power. And so Hollywood seeks to cater new propaganda, new fantasies, to them.

Most of emerging queer movies, like Freak Show, and Love Simon target confused teenagers in the West and give them societal approval to be queer. The future consumers of pink capitalism. Others, like Disobedience and Wound are more sinister and target conservative traditions. These directors are a little more ambitious and go an extra step to stir some shit up.

In the 40s, yes, it was simpler, but so were people. They had less sources of information. The churches has much more power over minds. Of course today people are manipulated in all sorts of ways, but the opportunity to get information that will make you skeptical of the dominant meme and culture allow individuals a better chance of disengaging. The roles of both men and women were much stiffer then. People dove at specific boxes and the propaganda suggesting they do that DID NOT NEED TO BE advanced, or as advanced.

Also the political messages in the 1940s-1960s are almost the exact opposite as the prevalent messages today. Housewives, traditional gender-roles, the nuclear family, the Red Scare, etc.

To me it doesn't matter how I or we are being manipulated and boxed, but that we are being boxed. The social pressures for conformism were simpler and much more effective in the sense that anyone doing something different really stood out. Yes, most individual diversity today is shallow, on the other hand it is easier to find others and streams and subcultures within the dominant culture if you are awake enough or skeptical enough or have enough intuition to do so.

It seems the Red Scare is still alive though. The government scared the US populace of Russian, and still do it today (scapegoating the Democrat loss in the recent election).

[/quote]And we still get right wing BS from HOllywood about how experts, government and industry and police and the CIA and so on, must be trusted, espcially in crisis. Hollywood does tend tot he left, but when it comes to foreign policy and power and class dynamics it sends out very mixed messages, never manages to stop militarycorporate choices and ultimately marginalizes independent thinking. Hollywood would overwhelmingly push for Democrats. Whoopy, a slightly left party, wholly beholden to Wall street and the Military industrial complex. The right is upset at Hollywood's spreading of certain social values and there is a lot to criticize there. but the rights fucking social values were deadening, controlling, shaming, garbage. I'm old enough to have lived through when they had the political correctness and it was completely fucked up. Such hatred of anything out of the box. Like that asshole, childhating 7th grade teacher glaring at students was in charge of all minds. Such fearfilled and yet at the same time fear denying (not being honest, that is) ideas about women, men, normality, other races, sexuality, sex in general, how to fucking sit for gods sake. A fucking nation of gray minded peopel clucking their tongues at anything that wasn't what they thought was normal. And then making sure the police, teachers, psychiatrists, employers punished anyone for being slightly different. I am not even thinking of sexuality. Anything, stuff you take for granted today as being within the range of normal, even right wing people. Let alone the infantilization of women. No housewife should feel shame for being that, sure. But the incredibly idiotic limitations put on the minds of women are completely contradicted by what women are clearly capable of. And men, the right's political correctness made stiff, bizzarre, cardboard men who were socially retarded.

Karpel Tunnel wrote:And we still get right wing BS from HOllywood about how experts, government and industry and police and the CIA and so on, must be trusted, espcially in crisis. Hollywood does tend tot he left, but when it comes to foreign policy and power and class dynamics it sends out very mixed messages, never manages to stop militarycorporate choices and ultimately marginalizes independent thinking. Hollywood would overwhelmingly push for Democrats. Whoopy, a slightly left party, wholly beholden to Wall street and the Military industrial complex. The right is upset at Hollywood's spreading of certain social values and there is a lot to criticize there. but the rights fucking social values were deadening, controlling, shaming, garbage. I'm old enough to have lived through when they had the political correctness and it was completely fucked up. Such hatred of anything out of the box. Like that asshole, childhating 7th grade teacher glaring at students was in charge of all minds. Such fearfilled and yet at the same time fear denying (not being honest, that is) ideas about women, men, normality, other races, sexuality, sex in general, how to fucking sit for gods sake. A fucking nation of gray minded peopel clucking their tongues at anything that wasn't what they thought was normal. And then making sure the police, teachers, psychiatrists, employers punished anyone for being slightly different. I am not even thinking of sexuality. Anything, stuff you take for granted today as being within the range of normal, even right wing people. Let alone the infantilization of women. No housewife should feel shame for being that, sure. But the incredibly idiotic limitations put on the minds of women are completely contradicted by what women are clearly capable of. And men, the right's political correctness made stiff, bizzarre, cardboard men who were socially retarded.

In spite of that I'm not yet certain that America is "more free" today than in the 1950s. Western civilization has yet to feel the consequences and repercussions of these massive withdrawals of morals and morality. Culture has regressed, despite the advancement of Hollywood. Sure there are gems here and there. But the 90% of other shit out there, clogging the tubes, the 'information' and data fed into average people and "the consumer", needs to be pointed out at least.

The culture has regressed to Sensationalism (Trump, Fake News, etc) and Commercialism.

The base population, 80% of humanity, are literally inheritors of slave-genetics, and this reflects lower levels of intelligence. Low and average intelligent humanity clings to mythology, fantasy, and whatever 'conspiracy' theory, because this is how their minds retain ideals of control. If everything can be reduced to mind-games, to disregard reality, then this is how the powerless retain the hope for control in their own minds and personal lives. If reality can be negated, annulled, then low and average intelligent people, feel that they can 'control' or begin to order life, in their own way.

By the way, this is an interesting claim, especially the genetic part, or exploring a transition from genetic to memetic tendencies. How do you think populations like red necks and zionist jews fit into this theory?